The Dirty Independence Question

[eFestivals]

why do you think you can speak for the whole of scotland? Just because you live there? I wouldnt dream of thinking I speak for the whole of england. It is an absurd concept.

I am sure your personal values are admirable. But why on earth do you think you represent all of scotland?

Very bizarre.

I don't think he thinks he representing Scotland, I think he thinks that he's representing yes with that idea.

Much of the yes campaign is based within the idea that an independent Scotland would do all the wonderful things that "English tories" refuse to consider doing.

And yet doing all of those things would require Scotland to hugely change it's current financial set-up - essentially: tax people harder.

The SNP stood for the Scottish Parliament in its early days with a policy of "a penny for Scotland" - an increase in income tax by 1% for everyone, with the poorest benefiting from the extra tax revenue.

And Scotland rejected that idea.

And the SNP have now rejected that idea.

Because a greedy fuck is always a greedy fuck, and everything about indy is based in greed.

[russycarps]

I don't think he thinks he representing Scotland, I think he thinks that he's representing yes with that idea.

Much of the yes campaign is based within the idea that an independent Scotland would do all the wonderful things that "English tories" refuse to consider doing.

And yet doing all of those things would require Scotland to hugely change it's current financial set-up - essentially: tax people harder.

The SNP stood for the Scottish Parliament in its early days with a policy of "a penny for Scotland" - an increase in income tax by 1% for everyone, with the poorest benefiting from the extra tax revenue.

And Scotland rejected that idea.

And the SNP have now rejected that idea.

Because a greedy fuck is always a greedy fuck, and everything about indy is based in greed.

yes sorry, I meant representing the majority of scotland (he thinks the yes vote will win so must also believe the yes voters are the majority right?)

Hating the tories doesnt make you a socialist.

[Buff124]

even in the SNP's eyes, some currency options are more disastrous for iScotland than others - which is precisely why they want a CU.

And funnily enough, that's the identical view from Westminster - so the rationale works the same, it's the viewpoint a person looks from which changes the conclusion.

And so....

This is a perfect example of how the yes campaign doesn't apply the rational, instead operating double-standards where the Scottish view is always the right view for everyone.

----

And it's all so laughable. I've yet to see a single yes supporter say "CU is the best thing for Scotland", without exception they all say "my choice would be different". But then they go on to say "how dare Westminster refuse* Scotland anything, that proves they're evil".

(*even if it's something that person says they don't want )

And it's all so laughable. There's a campaign that's about how horrible it is to be shackled by Westminster, where the supporters of that campaign are complaining about Westminster refusing to shackle them.

And it's all so laughable. There's a campaign that aims to make Scotland a foreign country to the rest of the UK, where the supporters of that campaign are complaining about the fact that the UK will treat Scotland as a foreign country.

And it's all so laughable. There's a campaign that aims to change Scotland's status instead of keeping it the same, while supporters of that campaign complain about how Westminster aren't offering change.

The saying normally goes "you couldn't make it up". But Scotland has.

Kwality mind games on both sides.

Won't post the inevitable John Lennon vid. Yet.

Edited May 16, 2014 by Buff124

[Buff124]

yep, mind games. limmy's goat it sussed.

[Comfy Bean]

Something to tap the foot along to..........

Have a good weekend everyone.

[LJS]

Oh no. Comfy has unleashed the ultimate deterrent.

[LJS]

Just for clarity, I do not claim to speak on behalf of the people of Scotland, or the Yes campaign. I am simply offering my observations and opinions. I don't claim to have any special insight other than that gained from living & working in Scotland all my life in a number of diverse areas of the country.

It is always easy to oversimplify things when discussing these matters and that may sometimes come across as idealism. so, again for clarity, Scotland is not a nation of saintly socialists willing to lay down their lives for anyone less fortunate than themselves. We have our racists, homophobes, fraudsters & thieves, the same as anywhere else.

All I claim is the political centre here is situated somewhere to the left of where it is in England. This is by no means an eccentric view, indeed I would argue that it is accepted my the majority of commentators.

The fact that Neil & Russy appear to attach no value to my experience is of no significance to me - in fairness I attach very little significance to their opinions on the nature & character of the Scottish electorate - sometimes distance allows you to see things more clearly, but not always.

I don't really care if either of you trash this with your usual mixture of distortions & scaremongering. I am content in this debate to make my points rationally & let them stand or fall on their own merits.

There is no point in trying to engage nonsense like this

And it's all so laughable. I've yet to see a single yes supporter say "CU is the best thing for Scotland", without exception they all say "my choice would be different". But then they go on to say "how dare Westminster refuse* Scotland anything, that proves they're evil".

Now I presume you are talking about those of us on here who support yes - & certainly I won't deny that I have expressed doubts about whether CU is the best option (doubts - do you know what they are?) because a wee bit of googling will find plenty of yes supporters who do believe CU is the best thing.

Unfortunately, for your argument you won't find me (or I don't think Buffy) saying anything like the second bit - all I have ever "demanded" is that rUK negotiate in good faith as they are bound to do. I think I have also suggested that it will do so - as I believe rUK and iSCO's interests are not too dissimilar after a yes vote. And astonishingly I do not believe the UK is evil personified.

& finally (for now) I am in no way convinced that Yes will triumph in September. If I was a betting man I would still put my money on a narrow No.

If I speak as if I expect a Yes victory it is a triumph of hope over expectation & do feel free to insert your own "ifs" where appropriate.

Edited May 16, 2014 by LJS

[LJS]

For my cultural contribution, I cannot compete with the comedic Brilliance of Limmy or the musical peaks scaled by RunRig, so here's a picture

[eFestivals]

Now I presume you are talking about those of us on here who support yes

nope, I'm talking in a much wider sense - it's not only the comments here by people engaged in the indyref debate that I'm reading.

At the end of the day, the fact that you're swallowing the line that "a CU would be good for both rUK & iScotland" without attempting to understand what is actually being asked of the UK (as you've shown on more than one occasion) makes you manna from heaven for the whole of the SNP's operating angle.

Cos if/when it doesn't happen, you'll also easily swallow the line that iScotland's problems are the fault of them from the south just as you're swallowing that line now.

As UKIP are showing, it's easy to be popular when you don't get held to account.

Edited May 17, 2014 by eFestivals

[LJS]

nope, I'm talking in a much wider sense - it's not only the comments here by people engaged in the indyref debate that I'm reading.At the end of the day, the fact that you're swallowing the line that "a CU would be good for both rUK & iScotland" without attempting to understand what is actually being asked of the UK (as you've shown on more than one occasion) makes you manna from heaven for the whole of the SNP's operating angle.Cos if/when it doesn't happen, you'll also easily swallow the line that iScotland's problems are the fault of them from the south just as you're swallowing that line now.As UKIP are showing, it's easy to be popular when you don't get held to account.

morning Neil.

usual tactic today I see.

tell me what I think.

then tell my why I'm wrong.

thanks, very helpful.

[LJS]

Perhaps this will help explain why I would like a system that makes it less likely that I will be governed by people who come up with ideas like this:

The power to take children away from their families could be privatised along with other child protection services under controversial plans the government has quietly announced.

The proposal from Michael Gove's Department for Education (DfE) to permit the outsourcing of children's social services in England to companies such as G4S and Serco has alarmed experts. They say profit-making companies should not be in charge of such sensitive family matters, and warn that the introduction of the profit motive into child protection may distort the decision-making process.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2014/may/16/privatise-child-protection-services-department-for-education-proposes

Whilst this particular proposal would not apply to Scotland (thanks to devolution) The Government that cam up with it are responsible for plenty of other measures that do affect Scotland. Whatever anyone may say, one thing I am confident of is that an independent Scotland will not elect a government with policies like this.

[LJS]

an antidote to Neil's claims that we are only in it for the jam

http://youtu.be/jBoQvoCkkH8

[LJS]

More scaremongering bollocks from the No side

Cinema Campaign - "Passport":

[Buff124]

More scaremongering bollocks from the No side

Cinema Campaign - "UK Embassies will slam the door in your face , Jock"

In foreign (i.e. non-Commonwealth) countries, the British embassy or consulate is traditionally responsible for Commonwealth citizens whose governments are not represented in the country concerned.

In general, citizens of the Republic of Ireland, although not Commonwealth citizens, are accorded the same rights and privileges as Commonwealth citizens.

http://vle.merthyr.ac.uk/pluginfile.php/60998/mod_resource/content/1/Who%20is%20a%20Commonwealth%20Citizen.docx

Edited May 17, 2014 by Buff124

[LJS]

I am going to break a rule of mine by not posting links from pro-independence sites.

The following link is from Wings over Scotland which I am sure many of you are familiar with.

http://wingsoverscotland.com/set-the-dials-to-maximum-cringe/#more-55264.

It concerns an article in today's Scottish Daily Mail - plugging a book from "leading Scottish author" Allan Brown , "50 People Who Screwed Up Scotland" Normally I would post a link direct from the newspaper's site - However it would appear that articles which are exclusive to Scotland are not on their website. Maybe they think the internet has not reached us Scots. This is frankly the most astonishing thing I have read for a long time.

here are a few extracts

“Those who cannot remember the past,” wrote the philosopher George Santanyana, “are condemned to repeat it.” And few groups have so effectively borne the claim out as have the Scots. The typical Scot knows his or her nation’s history like the typical three-year- old knows the contents of their toy box: unless an item is brightly coloured or makes a screechy noise they just don’t want to know

The history of Scotland is a 2,000-year-long Keystone Cops reel, a recurring loop of slapstick in which all things always go inexorably from bad to worse. Malcolm Tucker, the terrifying enforcer in BBC2’s The Thick Of It, summoned a fitting image: “God,” he sighed “It’s like watching a clown run across a minefield…”

For example, what, truly, differentiates the Scottish advocates of Pontius Pilate, the man who authorised the Crucifixion, from Ally MacLeod, manager of the Scottish football squad between 1977-78?

Uniquely amongst civilised nations, the Scots have learnt their national history not from a song or an epic poem but from a souvenir tea towel. You might recall the towel in question. It was always on sale in the gift shops and keepsake caves we encountered on childhood holidays to Mull and Millport.It depicted a tableau vivant in which frock-coated, full-bearded gents went about devising the objects that would commend them to history. Here, for instance, Baird was refining television as James Chalmers created the postage stamp. Over there, Charles Macintosh was fashioning the raincoat and, later, Alexander Fleming was synthesising penicillin.

What is truly astonishing is not that someone has written a book about this - (available on Amazon http://www.amazon.co.uk/50-People-Who-Screwed-Scotland/dp/1472103386) let's face it people write all sorts of odd books, but that any national newspaper (even one as lunatic as the daily mail ) would publish it.

Just in case you are wondering who the fifty guilty people are - if you follow the Amazon link you will see them listed in the contents.

They Include Lulu, Colin Montgomerie, Alex Harvey, Jim Kerr, Robert Burns, Neil Lennon, Nick Nairn, Ricky Gervais & many more.

Now I am not the biggest fan of all those people but I would hardly accuse them all of screwing Scotland.

What is even more astonishing is the names that are missing. John Knox doesn't make it & neither does Maggie Thatcher, Gordon Brown, Tony Blair.

I am close to being speechless!!!

I almost want to buy the book to find out what terrible things Colin Montgomerie has done!!!

[LJS]

Och here's another Cybernat lunatic who thinks Scotland could go it alone

[eFestivals]

morning Neil.

usual tactic today I see.

tell me what I think.

then tell my why I'm wrong.

thanks, very helpful.

Tell you what, let's do it a different way.

What would be classed as success for an iScotland?

[eFestivals]

Perhaps this will help explain why I would like a system that makes it less likely that I will be governed by people who come up with ideas like this:

A democrat gets democratic support for changing the system.

An anti-democrat re-draws the lines to ensure their victory.

[eFestivals]

In foreign (i.e. non-Commonwealth) countries, the British embassy or consulate is traditionally responsible for Commonwealth citizens whose governments are not represented in the country concerned.

In general, citizens of the Republic of Ireland, although not Commonwealth citizens, are accorded the same rights and privileges as Commonwealth citizens.

all the same, iScotland will have to spunk a disproportionate amount on creating and maintaining its own facilities.

Or is the Scottish version of independence an independence where Scotland is depenedent on everyone else?

Edited May 18, 2014 by eFestivals

[eFestivals]

The following link is from Wings over Scotland which I am sure many of you are familiar with.

It's probably more familiar to the English than it is to the Scots, seeing as it's English.

Post-indy tho, Scotland will have it's own video game magazine industry, obviously.

[Buff124]

all the same, iScotland will have to spunk a disproportionate amount on creating and maintaining its own facilities.

Or is the Scottish version of independence an independence where Scotland is depenedent on everyone else?

I'm merely pointing out that the Vote No Borders astroturf campaign is suggesting - using the medium of adverts being shown in Scottish cinemas this weekend - that a citizen of a hypothetical iScotland would be stranded abroad if he/she lost their passport in,say, Rio de Janeiro. There is a Uk consulate in Rio, so the inference is that no assistance would be offered by a hypothetical rUK consular presence.

Consular assistance is currently offered to the 2.2 billion people who hold citizenship within the 53 Commonwealth member countries, and also to Republic of Ireland nationals. To infer that iScotand would be excluded is part of the polarisation of the argument.

I can see the rationale for VNB's approach though. The No campaign have seemingly become aware of the groundswell of support for change amongst working class people in Scotland, and realised that they have to start scaring the C2DEs. To whit, there will be no safety net for an iScot's annual trip to Ibiza, Napa or Benidorm.

On the subject of 'spunking money' on consular facilities, you'll be aware of the number of consular sharing agreements between countries. Here's one example:

Canada and Australia have a Consular Sharing Agreement that allows Canadians to receive consular services from Australian officials in 20 countries where Canada does not have an office and for Australians to seek similar assistance from Canadian missions in 23 countries.

http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/australia-australie/bilateral_relations_bilaterales/political-politiques.aspx?lang=eng

and the Uk and Canada agreed a scheme in 2012 during William Hague's visit to Ottowa (where interestingly enough he also met with the then Governor of the Bank of Canada, a Mr Mark Carney).

EDIT: I've also been made aware of recent advances in mobile telecommunications which, I'm told, allows citizens to contact a representative of their government from just about anywhere in the world. Well I never.

Edited May 18, 2014 by Buff124

[LJS]

Tell you what, let's do it a different way.

What would be classed as success for an iScotland?

i can only answer this question for myself. I am speaking on no one else's behalf.

Well, I've made it pretty clear previously what my hopes are: & that I see it as a decision which will benefit Scotland in the long term.

In the short term success is simply getting the thing up & running successfully - having a currency that works (whatever it is) :being in the EU : Getting through the first five years whilst avoiding the apocalyptic vision of Better Together. Electing a Government that represents the people of Scotland :

Obviously, I want more than that but I think the first 5 years will be more about setting things up & getting them working rather than transforming Scottish Society overnight.

Success will also be measured for me about how Scotland deals with the potential division with the long campaign may have caused and how well we keep the thousands of people who have taken an interest in politics for the first time in their lives enagaged.

Edited May 18, 2014 by LJS

[LJS]

A democrat gets democratic support for changing the system.

An anti-democrat re-draws the lines to ensure their victory.

I believe those who believe in Independence are engaged in seeking "democratic support for changing the system"

that's kind of what a referendum is.

I'm not sure I get your point about redrawing lines - If the line is the border between Scotland & England no-one is suggesting we redraw that line which has remained unchanged for several hundred years. We won't even have to buy new road signs.

[Buff124]

I'm not sure I get your point about redrawing lines - If the line is the border between Scotland & England no-one is suggesting we redraw that line which has remained unchanged for several hundred years. We won't even have to buy new road signs.

Might wanna have a look at the eastern maritime boundary

Edited May 18, 2014 by Buff124

[LJS]

Might wanna have a look at the eastern maritime boundary

i'm pretty confident that was not what Neil was talking about

I am sure he will enlighten us in due course.